Some thoughts

[quincy]

John and David

many thanks for a great job! There is not much room left for critics but allow me some thoughts after a first sighting:

I like Don Lilley's suggestion and reasoning to reduce casual water to areas where water is visible on the surface.
And it's difficult to disagree with Phil Bridges - as usual.

Immovable Obstructions

nine times out of ten relief is required and granted for roads and paths, sprinkler heads, drainage covers and the like, flat and/or covering the ground. Metal spikes having disappeared there is no need any longer for granting stance relief IMHO. Someone might come up with an elegant definition of this kind of obstructions.

Ball in a movable obstruction not found

Is this Rule really necessary ? A ball in a garbage bin or on a greenkeeper's vehicule ? It happens once in a lifetime.

Water hazard - opposite side option

On a course where a stream borders a hole this relief option for a ball which enters the hazard from the wrong side could only be replaced by additional bridges. I think a note should be added which allows a committee to introduce a Local Rule providing this option.

Power lines

Currently there are two Local Rules in the book. Is there a reason to deal with permanent and temporary Power lines in different Rules?

Some hairsplitting

as near as possible - as nearly as possible: either, or but not both (R. 23-1)

(And why not grab the opportunity to define it: index/thumb span, hand span, 6 inches or whatever ?)

Cleaning a lifted ball

I suggest to shift this from R. 5-3 to R. 19-1, added to the first sentence.
In other Rules (15-1, 22-1) "cleaning" can be skipped.

Last but not least: it will be hard to convince the world but I love the idea of dropping and re-dropping to disappear - and with it myriads of penalty strokes and numerous Decisions.

Kind regards quincy

[John Morrissett]

Quincy -

Thank you so much for taking the time to go through Code One and sharing your thoughtful comments.

Some initial comments to your thoughts:

(1) "Flat" obstructions - The point you make is certainly valid in that it is hardly an imposition to stand on a path or sprinkler head to play a ball. However, that direction becomes a problem with "vertical" obstructions. The suggestion of differentiating the types of obstructions (ground level vs. vertical) has some philosophical appeal, but I would be concerned about adding a layer of complexity (with now two different types of immovable obstructions) to achieve that goal.

(2) Ball in movable obstruction not found - The Rules survived for many years without this provision, but enough incidents kept coming up (esp. a ball that becomes lodged in a cart or other vehicle) that the current provision was added. While your suggestion is consistent with this project's theme of not worrying about the rare and unusual incidents, this situation is concerning in that, without the provision, the Rules provide no guidance other than seemingly to suggest that the player must proceed under stroke and distance. Would you be willing to accept stroke and distance as the result (not a rhetorical question)?

(3) Water hazard (opposite margin option) - We decided to eliminate this option as (a) it is used rarely and (b) it is not well understood. My concern with going the Local Rule route is that, as much as possible, David and I tried to stay away from Local Rules (in fact we incorporated several into the Rules themselves) as we believe that Local Rules are a source of confusion among golfers as they move from course to course and competition to competition.

(4) Power lines - The issue with the Local Rule in Decision 33-8/13 is that it is best adopted when only a decent shot may strike the power line and not necessarily when only a terrible shot might strike it. However, that distinction arguably runs contrary to the theme of not worrying too much about incidents on either end of the spectrum. Therefore, inserting something into the Rules themselves could have appeal; on the other hand, a case could be made for just eliminating the two Local Rules and having the player in all cases play the ball as it lies (as the replay requirement would add the complexity of treating two obstructions differently). Hmmmm.

(5) As near as possible - Late into this project we made an effort to stick with "near" as we believe that to be the preferred word. However, as you identified, we didn't quite catch all the "nearly"s! Thank you for spotting that.

David and I look forward to your thoughts on Code Two!

Best regards,
John

[quincy]

John

I love the atmosphere here, old friends wherever I look !

Ball lost in a movable obstruction.

Have there really been enough incidents of this kind ? I recall a single one on one of the professional tours, must be twenty years ago, where a player was searching in a rubbish bin for five minutes.

Flat IOs

Vertical obstructions such as staked trees, buildings or telephone poles are on one hand rarely in the vicinity of where a properly struck ball comes to rest and on the other hand, if his swing is not impeded and the player has only stance interference he has still a shot. The longer I think about it the more I see a point in denying stance relief for IOs altogether. But this is probably for another day.

Power Lines

There are probably more power lines interfering with the game in Switzerland than anywhere in the world.

On my home course there are 16 cables crossing rectangularly the fairways #1 and 2 at 140 yards from the back tees, struck at least twice per hour, and the LR as in D. 33-8/13 is the only chapter in the book every single member has understood and applies properly. We would have a hard time to explain to them that from now on they have to play their ball as it lies.

One point I have forgotten in my first post. The fundamental Rules of the game, play the course as you find it and the ball as it lies, would merit a proper location in the current or a future Rule book: In Rule one or even in a preamble.

quincy

[Simonko]

I think if I was at your course Quincy I'd like the challenge of keeping the ball under the power lines or going over them. Much fairer IMO than getting to replay a shot clearly heading for trouble.